DEFENDANTS REQUEST RETRIAL IN CANON CASE

Aftermarket supplies businesses Color Imaging and General Plastic Industrial have urged the courts to provide them with a new trial because the jury ordered them to pay “grossly excessive damages” to Canon.

Color Imaging, Inc. (CI), based in Georgia USA, and General Plastic Industrial Co., Ltd. (GPI) of Taiwan filed the order with the US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta requesting an “alternative remittitur”—where the judge reduces the damages awarded by a jury—or a new trial.

It only took a jury a few hours back in June to return a guilty verdict where CI and GPI were found to have “willfully infringed Canon’s patent No. 7,647,012.” Canon was awarded the full measure of damages, however, Canon asked the court to enhance the damages award by up to three times, which is permitted under the law.

According to the court filings, copies of which have been supplied to RT Media, “a patentee may be awarded “reasonable royalty” damages for the infringer’s sales. The royalty rate for these damages is based on the results of “a hypothetical negotiation between the patentee and the infringer at a time before the infringing activity began.” CI and GPI argue, “Royalties, like lost profits, are compensatory damages, not punitive.”

The motion for a reduction in the damages or a new trial argues the jury agreed with Canon that the defendants owed it $3,740,604 based on a royalty rate of $12 for each empty bottle the defendants manufactured, even though GPI only sold its empty bottles for $3.59. The defendants claim the verdict reflects a royalty award that was 566% of GPI’s gross profit and over 334% of GPI’s revenues.

Their motion requests a new trial for reasonable royalty damages, if “Canon refuses to agree to a reduction (remittitur) to $564,207.80” which they consider to be reasonable royalty damages.